I currently like Persona 4. But there are ZERO people of colour in it, everyone is white. Even the guy who calls himself funky and wears a big afro is white. Despite that it's still a really good game.

I think it's always good to point out that the aspects that are wrong even in the things you love and adore._________________No one is every truly alone with pizza.

Am I the only one that read that comic strip and went 'Yup, Tat is making a play off the comments from yesterday's strip'.

I almost bust a gut laughing when I read today's comic and it had nothing to do with the actual content of the comic itself, but the links between the comic and comments in the thread about the previous strip.

I currently like Persona 4. But there are ZERO people of colour in it, everyone is white. Even the guy who calls himself funky and wears a big afro is white. Despite that it's still a really good game.

I think it's always good to point out that the aspects that are wrong even in the things you love and adore.

Well, not really, the game takes place in Japan, and a rural countryside village at that.

Only 1.5% o Japan is of a different ethnicity than Japanese, and of that 1.5% most stick close to the large city centers.

So yeah, it's not that strange to see no other "people of color" besides the natural Japanese. Also the Afro is a trend in Japan, so it's not uncommon to see Japanese people with Afros.

If anything I'm glad they didn't force an ethnicity in just to have a token one._________________The Angry Asshat.

It's unfortunate when mere theory gets in the way of enjoying an interesting work. For theory often isn't beautiful in its own right.

It's unfortunate when people watch shows without thinking about them.

Yes, but opposite can also be a flaw. Western literature was long hampered by a slavish dependence on the poetic theory of Aristotle. Literary theories frequently suffer from pettiness, sterility and moral prescriptivism, compared to the things they criticise, which need not subscribe to any particular set of regulations to be good. It obviously depends on the critic to a large extent - a pedant will view things pedantically, a moralist like a censor. Monique still enjoys her television series, without condeming it on the basis of her femininst philosophy, so I wasn't suggesting that that she errs excessively (though "it's still pretty good" does suggest she is giving it a report card based not on its artistic merits but on how closely it conforms to her philosophy's construction of an ideal work of art). Anyway, I think it inherently wrong-headed to approach any work according to the dictates of an -ism.

Last edited by merest on Thu May 16, 2013 7:45 pm; edited 1 time in total

It's unfortunate when mere theory gets in the way of enjoying an interesting work. For theory often isn't beautiful in its own right.

It's unfortunate when people watch shows without thinking about them.

Yes, but opposite can also be a flaw. Western literature was long hampered by a slavish dependence on the poetic theory of Aristotle. Literary theories frequently suffer from pettiness, sterility and moral prescriptivism, compared to the things they criticise, which need not subscribe to any particular set of regulations to be good. It obviously depends on the critic to a large extent - a pedant will view things pedantically, a moralist like a censor. Monique still enjoys her television series, without condeming it on the basis of her femininst philosophy, so I wasn't suggesting that that she errs. Still, I think it inherently wrong-headed to approach any work according to the dictates of an -ism.

You impress us all with your erudite sophistry. Tell me more big words about things that have everything to do with a webcomic that is currently exploring feminist themes.

You know what else western literature has long been hampered with?

Fucking patriarchy.

You think people used to be too critical along one particular line, so now you're skittish of anyone being critical along any lines at all? Or is it just feminist/progressive ones?

I don't think I used any big words, unless you think words like 'pedantically' obscure. (Though, yes, I probably haven't have said 'prescriptivism', which does have the stench of academia.) As for feminism, I did not criticise it in the slightest, though it may have seemed that way when I compared Monique's use of its criteria to the narrow application of Aristotelian literary theory in the past. Dogmatism usually errs, even when it is on the side of what it thinks good - which it always is.

You impress us all with your erudite sophistry. Tell me more big words about things that have everything to do with a webcomic that is currently exploring feminist themes.

You know what else western literature has long been hampered with?

Fucking patriarchy.

You think people used to be too critical along one particular line, so now you're skittish of anyone being critical along any lines at all? Or is it just feminist/progressive ones?

I don't think I used any big words, unless you think words like 'pedantically' obscure. (Though, yes, I probably haven't have said 'prescriptivism', which does have the stench of academia.) As for feminism, I did not criticise it in the slightest, though it may have seemed that way when I compared Monique's use of its criteria to the narrow application of Aristotelian literary theory in the past. Dogmatism usually errs, even when it is on the side of what it thinks good - which it always is.

How about joining the actual conversation that is happening rather than just typing out the one that's going on in your own head?

How about joining the actual conversation that is happening rather than just typing out the one that's going on in your own head?

I take it that a) you do not understand my point, b) you think I do not have one (or that I address something you consider irrelevant), or c) you suggest that I contribute to an unspecified conversation. The first option would be uncharitable of me to assume, the second option would be uncharitable of you to assume, and the third option is ambiguous. A unsatisfactory trilemma.

Monique still enjoys her television series, without condeming it on the basis of her femininst philosophy, so I wasn't suggesting that that she errs excessively (though "it's still pretty good" does suggest she is giving it a report card based not on its artistic merits but on how closely it conforms to her philosophy's construction of an ideal work of art).

actually, i think it's pretty clear that she's saying "it's still pretty good" DESPITE not conforming with her philosophy._________________aka: neverscared!

It's unfortunate when mere theory gets in the way of enjoying an interesting work. For theory often isn't beautiful in its own right.

It's unfortunate when people watch shows without thinking about them.

Yes, but opposite can also be a flaw. Western literature was long hampered by a slavish dependence on the poetic theory of Aristotle. Literary theories frequently suffer from pettiness, sterility and moral prescriptivism, compared to the things they criticise, which need not subscribe to any particular set of regulations to be good. It obviously depends on the critic to a large extent - a pedant will view things pedantically, a moralist like a censor. Monique still enjoys her television series, without condeming it on the basis of her femininst philosophy, so I wasn't suggesting that that she errs excessively (though "it's still pretty good" does suggest she is giving it a report card based not on its artistic merits but on how closely it conforms to her philosophy's construction of an ideal work of art). Anyway, I think it inherently wrong-headed to approach any work according to the dictates of an -ism.

Oh I get what your saying, a movie, show or any piece of entertainment shouldn't be judged badly because they don't follow your certain ideals. As long as the entertainment is not actively fighting said ideals, your enjoyment of the material should be the deciding factor._________________The Angry Asshat.